Obama supporters. I have one question

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by gonefishcrazy
http:///forum/post/2538418
Im done posting. Someone had the nerve to delete my post and I did'nt even say what I wanted to say. Now I know where you stand on these issues. Free at Last, Free at Last, Thank God Almighty Im free at last.
Hey; I deleted your post... All it said was "Im gonna stay mute before I say something that offends people who are not racist...."
I had to delete several posts in a row there, and since you posted a single sentence saying basically "I'm not going to post anything" I didn't see the reason to leave it. I've undeleted it.
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2538623
Hey; I deleted your post... All it said was "Im gonna stay mute before I say something that offends people who are not racist...."
I had to delete several posts in a row there, and since you posted a single sentence saying basically "I'm not going to post anything" I didn't see the reason to leave it. I've undeleted it.

Something along those same lines was posted in another thread. I say saddle up and say what you want to say crazy. Don't beat around the bush.
 

beth

Administrator
Staff member
I think you will see discrimination in all kinds of places, including the courthouse, work place, school, stores, etc. And the discrimination is not just directed at blacks by any means. Black discrimination against other races is very real. And in communities where there are larger populations of blacks, you will see larger discrimination against other non-black races and ethnic groups.
What I do see too much so in lower income black communities is a mentality or acceptance of bad behaviors and a belief that government, schools, etc. should be responsible for resolving issues and that "circumstances" is to blame for all of the social economic problems. Basically, the welfare mentality and someone other than myself is to blame and needs to fix my problems. I'll compare this to my own ethnic background, which is Cuban-American. Most of the Cuban Americans who immigrated here pre-Communist Cuba have a strong work ethic, family values, a respect for democracy and value freedom in a way that most US born folks take for granted. Too many post communist Cubans immigrating basically feel that the government owes them and their role is to take as much as they can. The welfare mentality is in full force. They have little respect for this country, or for themselves for that matter. Granted, I am speaking in gross generalities, but living in Florida, where there is a lot of diversity with many cultures and races, and having worked for the government here many years and in different cities, I do have some experience.
What I am trying to say, is that being poor or deprived in and of itself does not equate to creating all the problems such as drugs, crime, unemployment, broken families, etc. Attitude and mentality, in my view, is everything.
I would consider my own family growing up as being rather low income. Both my parents were uneducated. My father joined the military when he was 17 where he served for 30 years (and in 2 wars) after which he served for 20 more years as a civil servant. Neither of my parents finished school, yet they had two children who never broke the law and were both put through college. I grew up in a neighborhood of mostly blacks and Hispanics, not a privileged white neighborhood. This neighborhood was low income, culturally diverse, yet, somehow I and my brother ended up as law abiding citizens and in a better economic position than my parents. I can't really say social programs, government, or schools had much to do with that result. Have I personally experienced prejudice, oh yeah I have, but that will take another long winded post.
 

rylan1

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2537755
That's right, I do "cruise the internet" to find support for my arguments. Is it too much to ask that you do the same?
Rylan, you've had dogs sniff your car? You've been pulled over 10+ times? Big deal. I've been pulled over more than 10 times in the 20 years I've been driving. I've had police guns drawn on me twice. I've been asked to stand in the rain and snow both while police looked into my car. I was once pulled over by a State Trooper who said simply "No big deal, just saw the dealer plates on your car, and as this hwy is a known drug route thought I better take a look". I once was in a Taxi that was stopped and searched by INS. I've been pulled over 3 times for being in a wealthy neighborhood late at night. I was pulled over at least once in a city that is primarily Hispanic because "white" was the description of a suspect the police were looking for. Having said all of that, let me explain the relevance; I'm caucasian
. I went to a Church in the wealthy neighborhood and was often there late at night helping out. I was pulled over leaving from there multiple times. Both times guns were drawn on me were mistakes by the police. I got pulled over for speeding because I was speeding... I've never been in trouble for anything (other than speeding), i've been on staff at churches for over 12 years, I'm white, yet I've had many encounters with police.
Even in that thread of mine you quoted I simply asked for a source to back up your claims... I'm not arguing Rylan, I'm just asking for you to do exactly what I do; back up your claims.
Honestly Rylan, the fact you think I am blind and less credible on other issues is a mute point. I have never once asked you to trust me. I post info to back up my positions. Sadly, you seem to take the position it's ok to post whatever you believe to be true and then ignore the facts when presented. My gosh Rylan, how many threads of yours have I corrected with actual facts?
I'm giving you a blank check here Rylan. I'm simply asking you back up your position that the judicial system is biased against minorities. i'm willing to entertain that issue as I haven't studied it. I'm not willing, however, to take your opinion or premises as fact.
I ask about juries because I am genuinely curious. Are minority criminals being sentenced more harshly by minority juries? Are juries being unfairly picked to stack the deck against minoritires? I honestly don't know... I'm asking YOU to provide evidence as you are the one saying the judicial system is flawed.
10 times 20 years is different than 10 times 3 years.... I had no reason to be pulled over... I remember once I was pulled over and the officer said he couldn't see my front plate... He stopped me... didn't bother to look at my front plate to see it was there... Preceaded to ask me a bunch of ridiculous questions...keep in mind this is like 3pm... where I was going, where I worked, what my parents did... and on and on while having his hand on his weapon and asking my passenger to lift up items in the backseat... There was no logical reason for him to stop me.. I recieved no warning or ticket... once this happens so many times you get upset... I mentioned I went to a bar/club w some friends this past weekend and they refused us entry...noting our jeans where to baggy or our shoes were unacceptable... we had casual shoes on like steve maddens... not tennis shoes... while at the same time.. white guys go in... pants are fit the same if not more loose... they have their nikes on.. and their is no problem... this happens time after time... I'm not going to discount your experiences.. but when things like this continue to happen based on no other reason than a stereotype or your race you get fed up... I makes me think back to times where it was more blatant and we had it worse... and I wonder how they dealt with it.. they simply were conditioned to deal with it... I've grown up in predominately white communites that were mixed my entire life.. I've had relationships with people of other races and some of my best friends are of different races... I work in a office where I am the only black person out of 60 or so... I have no problem with interacting and being around different people.. but what I have realized is that it is hard for people who have not experienced this to have empathy to what some people go through... because they simply pass it off as get over it as if it only happened once.. which I could do... but when it happens time and time again... you can't just ignore it..
 

rylan1

Active Member
There are several bits of info... I'll list accordingly...
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Table1718.pdf
To some extent, racial disproportions in drug arrests reflect demographic factors. Drug law enforcement is concentrated in large urban areas. Illicit drug use is also higher in large metropolitan areas.90 Since more blacks, proportionately, live in these areas than whites, black drug offenders are at greater risk of arrest than white offenders.91 But within metropolitan areas, politics and law enforcement priorities have determined how drug arrests would be distributed.
Within urban areas, the "major fronts" in the drug wars have been low income minority neighborhoods. With the spread of crack in the early 1980s, these neighborhoods suffered from the disorder, nuisance, and assaults on the quality of life that accompanied increased drug dealing on the streets as well as the crime and violence that accompanied the development of crack distribution systems. Dismayed residents in those neighborhoods pressed the police and public officials to "do something." But the residents' response was more than matched by the censure, outrage, and concern from outsiders that was fanned by incessant and frequently sensationalist media stories about crack, and by politicians seeking electoral advantage by being "tough on crime."92
 

rylan1

Active Member
Although crack was the least used of all illicit drugs in the U.S., and although more whites used illicit drugs than blacks (see Table 17, above), the "war on drugs" has been targeted most notoriously at the possession and sale of crack cocaine by blacks. Crack cocaine in black neighborhoods became a lightning rod for a complicated and deep-rooted set of racial, class, political, social, and moral dynamics.93 To the extent that the white majority in the U.S. identified both crime and drugs with the "dangerous classes" -- i.e., poor urban blacks -- it was easier to endorse, or at least acquiesce in, punitive penal policies that might have been rejected if members of their own families and communities were being sent to prison at comparable rates.94
Tactical considerations also encouraged the concentration of anti-drug resources in disadvantaged minority neighborhoods and the consequent disproportionate number of black drug offender arrests. Police departments point to the number of arrests as a measure of effectiveness. The circumstances of life and the public nature of drug transactions in low income urban neighborhoods make arrests far easier there than in other neighborhoods.95 In poor black neighborhoods, drug transactions are more likely to be conducted on the streets, in public, and between strangers, whereas in white neighborhoods -- working class through upper class -- drugs are more likely to be sold indoors, in bars, clubs, and private homes. "n poor urban minority neighborhoods, it is easier for undercover narcotics officers to penetrate networks of friends and acquaintances than in more stable and closely knit working-class and middle-class neighborhoods. The stranger buying drugs on the urban street corner or in an alley, or overcoming local suspicions by hanging around for a few days and then buying drugs, was commonplace. Police undercover operations can succeed [in working and middle-class neighborhoods] but they take longer, cost more, and are less likely to succeed."96
 

rylan1

Active Member
Racial profiling -- the police practice of stopping, questioning, and searching potential criminal suspects in vehicles or on the street based solely on their racial appearance -- has also contributed to racially disproportionate drug arrests, although there are no reliable estimates of the number. In many locales, black drivers are disproportionately stopped for minor traffic offenses and then searched.97 Similarly, blacks and other minorities have been disproportionately targeted in "stop and frisk" operations in which police temporarily detain, question, and pat down pedestrians suspected of criminal activity. In New York City, for example, between January 1998 and March 1999, police officers made far more stop and frisks in minority neighborhoods; even within neighborhoods with primarily white populations, the majority of the people stopped were black or Hispanic.98
Other factors have also been important in increasing the relative rate at which black drug offenders are arrested compared to whites. For example, low income purchasers of cocaine buy the drug in the cheap form of single or several hits of crack. They must engage in far more illegal transactions to satisfy their desire for drugs than middle or upper class consumers of powder cocaine who have the resources to buy larger and longer lasting supplies. The greater frequency of purchases and sales may well affect susceptibility to arrest. 99
There is a mountain of statistics about the rate of incareration, sentencing, and other disparities in the criminal justice system.. I'll include more as needed
 

rylan1

Active Member
Some supporters of the war on drugs have justified the incarceration of drug offenders on the assumption that it incapacitates people who are dangerous apart from their drug-dealing. Research to date on the criminal histories of incarcerated drug offenders consistently shows, however, that most cannot reasonably be considered dangerous individuals. Three quarters of the drug offenders in state prisons in 1997 had no prior convictions for violent crimes; one third had prior sentences limited to drug offenses.64 In 1991, fourteen percent of the drug offenders in state prisons had no prior sentence; 84 percent had no prior sentences for violent crimes.65 Human Rights Watch's analysis of incarcerated drug offenders in New York revealed that the majority had nonviolent criminal histories.66 Among felony defendants in large urban counties arrested on drug charges, 38 percent had no prior convictions, even for a misdemeanor; only 11 percent had a prior felony conviction for a violent crime.67 Independent researchers determined that Arizona, New Mexico, and New York imprison large numbers of drug-only offenders, i.e. people whose current offense is a drug crime and whose past criminal offenses were limited to low level nonviolent drug crimes. 68 In Massachusetts, an analysis of a sample of incarcerated male drug offenders revealed most had either no prior criminal record, or records classified as minor or moderate.69
 

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2537880
True natured? The dude is endorsed by thugs like the new black panther party. Do a little research into their issues and the rhetoric they use. What is it about Obama that attracts them to support him? He hangs with a member of the Weather Underground who proudly proclaimed he wished he had done more back when they were doing the bombings. Rezko scandle Etc. and the press has just started to really dig into this guy. Not saying you shouldn't support him if you agree with his left wing political philosophy but go into it with your eyes open. This guy is a run of the mill politician, nothing more.
Look at their views... one misnomer is that this group is not the same one of the 60's and 70's.... They are not thugs nor are they criminals.
Second, McCain is endorsed by KKK...
Third, wasn't Kerry accused of being an anti war protester involved w/ the same type of groups of the 60's?
McCain is not innocent...look at the Keating 5 and other incidents he has allegely been involved with...
Look at Clinton and all the personal, criminal, and financial scandals they've been involved with over the years...and the refusal to release recent financial records...Obama has done this for last 7 years..
Paint the entire picture... he is not your run of the mill politican... Compare the campaigns and you should be able to see a difference.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Rylan, that info you posted on drugs argues against what you were saying earlier.
You were arguing previously that the Government wasn't trying to fight the drug war. Now you post an article talking about how Law Enforcement targets drug infested poor neighborhoods? That's not racism Rylan, it's logistics. You put the most force where the problem is most concentrated..
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2538996
...McCain is not innocent...look at the Keating 5 and other incidents he has allegely been involved with....
Actually he is. A Democratic Congressional Committee and prosecutor found him to be innocent.
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2538996
Look at their views... one misnomer is that this group is not the same one of the 60's and 70's.... They are not thugs nor are they criminals.....
Taken from their webpage (New Black panthers):
*We want freedom. We want the power to practice self-determination, and to determine the destiny of our community and THE BLACK NATION
*We want tax exemption and an end to robbery of THE BLACK NATION by the CAPITALIST
*We believe that this wicked racist government has robbed us, and now we are demanding the overdue debt of reparations
*We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings, free health-care (preventive and maintenance). We want an end to the trafficking of drugs and to the biological and chemical warfare targeted at our people
*We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this devilish and decadent American society
*We believe that Black People should not be forced to fight in the military service to defend a racist government that holds us captive and does not protect us. We will not fight and kill other people of color in the world who, like Black People, are being victimized by the white racist government of America. We will protect ourselves from the force and violence of the racist police and the racist military, “by any means necessary
.”
*We want an immediate end to POLICE HARRASSMENT, BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black People. We want an end to Black-on-Black violence, “snitching,” cooperation and collaboration with the oppressor.
We believe we can end police brutality in our community by organizing Black self-defense groups (Black People’s Militias/Black Liberation Armies) that are dedicated to defending our Black Community from racist, fascist, police/military oppression and brutality

*We want freedom for all Black Men and Black Women held in international, military, federal, state, county, city jails and prisons.
*we want NATIONAL LIBERATION in a separate state or territory of our own, here or elsewhere, “a liberated zone” (“New Africa” or Africa), and a plebiscite to be held throughout the BLACK NATION in which only we will be allowed to participate for the purposes of determining our will and DIVINE destiny as a people. FREE THE LAND! “UP YOU MIGHTY NATION! YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WILL!” BLACK POWER
ya... They are a fine, upstanding group. They aren't preaching sedition, anarchy or rebellion. They aren't "thugs" at all...
 

zman1

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2539073
Actually he is. A Democratic Congressional Committee and prosecutor found him to be innocent
.
You are never found innocent, just not found guilty based on presented evidence, similar to O.J Simpson. Doesn't mean he is innocent, just not found guilty. Also, there are different rules between criminal and civil law.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2539098
You are never found innocent, just not found guilty based on presented evidence, similar to O.J Simpson. Doesn't mean he is innocent, just not found guilty. Also, there are different rules between criminal and civil law.
In a court of law that is correct.
McCain never went to trial. The congressional ethics investigation found him to be "innocent" of the charges. There exact words were Mcain's actions "were not improper nor attended with gross negligence..."
 

zman1

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2539119
"were not improper nor attended with gross negligence..."
Not enogh evidenice found to charge him with -
Robert C. Bennett, the committee's special counsel, recommended that Mr. Glenn and Mr. McCain be cleared. But Common Cause, which brought the original complaint against the five, argued that that would be "wholly unwarranted" because both Senators met with Federal regulators on behalf of Lincoln.
All five Senators benefited from the bank executive's largess: he or his associates gave $1.3 million to their campaigns or to groups they supported. The Senators, all Democrats except Mr. McCain, deny overstepping the bounds of propriety and say that doing favors for voters is a time-honored element of the American political system.
Senate and House rules do not define improper intervention with Federal officials. The closest the Senate comes is a rule stating the members should not benefit from compensation that would occur "by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position as a member, officer or employee."

[hr]
We have heard so much on this site about Resco and Obama - So he is "innocent" right now , correct?
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2539098
You are never found innocent, just not found guilty based on presented evidence, similar to O.J Simpson. Doesn't mean he is innocent, just not found guilty. Also, there are different rules between criminal and civil law.
According to Robert Bennet who was the Democrat party's lead investigative counsel during the time of the Keating ordeal he recomended that John McCain and John Glenn be dropped from the Senate investigation because after 18 months of investigations he found that neither men did anything wrong. He said he is unaware of any other time a Senate committee ignored the advice of their lead investigator and it was obviously done because they didn't want it to be just 3 democrats being charged.
 

zman1

Active Member
Looking back to judge the furture - Time for "Tax and Spend" Democrats, again to be in control
August 10 Clinton-Gore Deficit Reduction Plan Enacted

Passed without a single Republican vote, the Clinton-Gore Administration’s economic plan established fiscal discipline by slashing the deficit in half — the largest deficit reduction plan in history — while making important investments in our economic future, including education, health care, and science and technology research. This legislation also extended the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by three years. Fiscal discipline established by the Clinton-Gore Administration has turned the largest deficits in our country’s history into the largest surplus. (PL 103-66, signed 8/10/93)
"Reinventing Government" Initiative Launched

President Clinton asked Vice President Gore to head the National Performance Review aimed at making government work better for less. The Vice President’s Reinventing Government Initiative has resulted in 377,000 fewer civilian employees in the federal government — the lowest level since the Kennedy Administration — and reduced federal spending as a share of the economy from 22.2 percent in 1992 to a projected 18.5 percent in 2000, the lowest since 1966.
http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accompli...tyears-03.html
What happened? - The wealthy tax cut and spend republicans took over......
Now the Republican congress did fight to reduce the FBI budget as part of their tax cut plan. So much for homeland defence
 

zman1

Active Member
What happened to all these Democrat ++++ - What happened? - The wealthy tax cut and spend republicans took over......
Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration:
The economy has created more than 22.5 million jobs in less than eight years—the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, are in the private sector.
Median Family Income Up $6,000 since 1993:
Economic gains have been made across the spectrum as family incomes increased for all Americans. Since 1993, real median family income has increased by $6,338, from $42,612 in 1993 to $48,950 in 1999 (in 1999 dollars).
Unemployment at Its Lowest Level in More than 30 Years:
Overall unemployment has dropped to the lowest level in more than 30 years, down from 6.9 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. The unemployment rate has been below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months. Unemployment for African Americans has fallen from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in October 2000, the lowest rate on record. Unemployment for Hispanics has fallen from 11.8 percent in October 1992 to 5.0 percent in October 2000, also the lowest rate on record.
Lowest Inflation since the 1960s: Inflation is at the lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, and it is down from 4.7 percent during the previous administration.
 

beth

Administrator
Staff member
I personally, and very strongly believe that we can spend our time in much better ways rather than advocating for or taking up the cause of drug dealers and criminals. Ryan, you seem intelligent, law abiding, and open to communication and ideas, why waste your valuable time extolling the woos of drugs dealers, pushers, users, and other criminals? Those types, whether black, white, or green, bring our society down.
Call me nuts, but there are much better causes out there to advocate on behalf of criminals.
Unless a cop starts to hurl racial slurs at you when they pull you over, or treat you in a racially demeaning way, I'm not sure why this would be so annoying (aside from just being stopped is a big hassle). Personally, I wish the cops in my town would do some of this to some of the people driving around....this place may be a tad safer. I'd be interested in hearing from any law enforcement folks on this end of things.
 
Top